| Abstract | Pri pisanju hrvatskog Ustava jedan od slijeđenih uzora bila je upravo Konvencija, a prilikom njezine ratifikacije, budući da je Europski sud za ljudska prava imao dugogodišnju praksu u zaštiti ljudskih prava, Ustavni sud se ugledao upravo na tu praksu. Europski sud za ljudska prava uspostavljen je Konvencijom, ujedno je i odgovoran za njezinu implementaciju. Konvencija propisuje znatan broj ljudskih prava koja se moraju poštivati, a njezin se sadržaj kroz razvoj prakse Europskog suda za ljudska prava nadograđivao i osuvremenjivao te je postala temelje zaštite ljudskih prava u konkretnim sudskih postupcima i pred nacionalnim ustavnim i redovnim sudovima. Ali sam tekst Konvencije nije dovoljan, za njezino značenje ključna je praksa od strane Europskog suda koji je „kreator europskih ustavnih standarda“ jer osigurava provedbu istih od strane nacionalnih tijela. Dakle, Europski sud za ljudska prava nadležan je za odlučivanje o podnesenim pojedinačnim i međudržavnim zahtjevima, čime ujedno prisiljava države potpisnice Konvencije na poštivanje njome zajamčenih ljudskih prava. A u slučaju ako utvrdi da je država potpisnica Konvencije povrijedila jedno ili više zajamčenih ljudskih prava donijet će presudu koje je obvezujuća za sve države potpisnice. Utjecaj Konvencije i prakse Europskog suda u Hrvatskoj, znatan je i višestran, prije svega zbog mehanizma izvršenja presuda. S time u vezi, s jedne strane, presude koje su donesena od strane Europskog suda kojima je utvrđeno da je Hrvatska povrijedila Konvenciju, jasno upućuju na potrebu unapređenja zaštite ljudskih prava u pojedinom području hrvatskog pravnog poretka, što se ne odnosi isključivo na praksu Ustavnog suda, nego ponekad zahtijeva i donošenje novih zakona ili promjenu postojećih zakona, promjenu prakse redovnih ili specijaliziranih sudova ili neke druge oblike poboljšanja zaštite ljudskih prava. Dok s druge strane, presude Europskog suda u kojima su utvrđene povrede Konvencije od strane drugih država potpisnica, služe istovremeno kao smjernice za hrvatski pravni poredak. Konvencija je ratificirana od Hrvatskog sabora dana 17. listopada 1997. te je tako postala dijelom unutarnjeg hrvatskog pravnog poretka s nadzakonskom pravnom snagom pa stranke mogu svoje zahtjeve temeljiti na Konvenciji i pozivati se na njezine odredbe. S toga osim što je preuzela dužnost da svakoj osobi pod svojom jurisdikcijom osigurava prava zajamečan Konvencijom, proizašala je i obveza svih sudova da domaće pravo tumače u skladu s navedenim standardima Konvencije te da prilikom njezine implementacije, efikasno štite europske pravne standarde. Nakon ratifikacije Konvencije, utjecaj stajališta Europskog suda postao je još izraženiji, a odnos između Ustavnog suda i Europskog suda dinamičniji. Budući da je Europski sud neprestano razvijao visoke standarde zaštite ljudskih prava, a na Ustavnom sudu je bilo da osigura prenošenje istih u hrvatski pravni predak. |
| Abstract (english) | In writing the Croatian Constitution, one of the following role models was precisely the Convention, and during its ratification, since the European Court of Human Rights had many years of practice in the protection of human rights, The Constitutional Court saw itself precisely in practice and before the ratification of the Convention itself. The European Court for Human Rights is established by the Convention, and is also responsible for its implementation. The Convention prescribes a significant number of human rights that must be followed, and its content has been upgraded and perfected through the development of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights and has now become the base for the protection of human rights in specific court procedures and before national constitutional and regular courts. But it is important to note that the text itself is not enough, for its meaning it is a key practice by the European Court of Justice, which is „ the creator of European constitutional standards“ because it ensures their implementation by national authorities, i.e. the courts of the Contracting States. That said, the European Court of Human Rights, as an international judicial body, has jurisdiction to decide on submitted individual and interstate claims, forcing States which are part of the Convention to respect it for guaranteed human rights. And in the event that it finds that a member state of the Convention has violated one or more guaranteed human rights, it shall render a judgment binding on all member states. The impact of the Convention and the practice of the European Court of Justice in Croatia is significant and multilateral, primarily due to the mechanism for enforcing judgments. With that being said, the judgments handed down by the European Court of Justice which found that Croatia had violated the Convention, clearly point on the need for improvement of protection of human rights in a particular area of the Croatian legal order, which does not apply exclusively to the practice of the Constitutional Court, but sometimes requires new laws or changes to the existing laws, changing the practice of regular or specialized courts or some other forms of improving the protection of human rights. While, on the other hand, the judgments of the European Court of Justice in which violations of the Convention by other mamber states have been established serve at the same time as guidelines for the Croatian legal order.Convention was ratified by the Croatian Parliament on 17 October 1997. and has thus become part of the internal Croatian legal order with a supranational legal force, so the parties can base their claims on the Convention and refer to its provisions. While the Republic of Croatia has not only become a High Contracting Party to the Convention, but has also undertaken to secure the rights guaranteed by the Convention to each person under its jurisdiction. The obligation of all courts to interpret domestic law in accordance with the above standards of the Convention has also arisen and, in its implementation, effectively protect European legal standards. Given that both courts have similar powers in the protection of human rights and that the Constitutional Court is, as a rule, the national court of the last appeal to which „victim“ human rights violations must be addressed before addressing the European Court of Justice, The European Court of Justice closely monitors the practice of the Constitutional Court in order to determine whether the proceedings before that court are an effective national means of protecting violated human rights. |
